The African Bishop of Hippo (VIS)

Originally posted by kirksey957
And I was simply wondering why they would sell an empty bottle? Would it not be beautifully symbolic to have a full bottle of refreshing water in light of all the wonderful images of water in the Bible, i.e "living water, etc."

But I'm all for the water and the bottle being free.

People want to buy these bottles, alone. Just as many Catholics buy rosaries, crosses, scapulars and images. They take them home as mementos of their pilgrimages and use them to create a religious ambience. It would be immoral to sell the bottles if they contained holy water. Such an act is known as the sin of simony. You might recall when Jesus chased the moneylenders from the temples. The scripture clearly condemns the use of spiritual goods for commercial gain.

And from what I could tell of the images that DoctorScribbles provided, the bottles must have been made at considerable expense. I doubt that they could offer them free to the thousands who attended his Mass.

Originally posted by Conrau K
People want to buy these bottles, alone. Just as many Catholics buy rosaries, crosses, scapulars and images. They take them home as mementos of their pilgrimages and use them to create a religious ambience. It would be immoral to sell the bottles if they contained holy water. Such an act is known as the sin of simony. You might recall when Jesus chased the ...[text shortened]... derable expense. I doubt that they could offer them free to the thousands who attended his Mass.

The cost would be mere chicken feed compared to the billions of dollars paid out to sexual abuse victims.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Do you think selling holy water is a worse sin than molesting a child?

Do you think all the news reports about thousands of priests molesting children and hundreds of bishops being complicit in such crimes are bogus?

Your position that church officials do not do wrong as a matter of policy is absurd.

Do you think selling holy water is a worse sin than molesting a child?

No.

Do you think all the news reports about thousands of priests molesting children and hundreds of bishops being complicit in such crimes are bogus?

Some are. One of my friends*, a priest, was a victim of spurious allegations. However, I do acknowledge that the majority of newseports are correct, and by virtue of their truth, highly alarming.

Your position that church officials do not do wrong as a matter of policy is absurd.

I have espoused no such position. I do recognise that leadership in the Catholic Church has failed to respond to the abuse crisis appropriately. However, just because the Church has erred in regards to this issue, does not mean the institution is corrupt and singularly dedicated to financial gains through commercial airlines and profiteering from spiritual goods.

So, I gather you have conceded defeat here? Unable to prove that the Catholic Church engages in dodgy business enterprises for self-gain, you raise the non sequitur of clerical abuse to vindicate your sectarian prejudices.

------------------------------

EDIT: *Well, an American priest I happen to know.

Originally posted by kirksey957
The cost would be mere chicken feed compared to the billions of dollars paid out to sexual abuse victims.

I doubt that insurance companies will fund religious freebies.

Originally posted by Conrau K

you raise the non sequitur of clerical abuse to vindicate your sectarian prejudices.

I raise it to demonstrate that the premise upon which you base your a priori finding that the church wouldn't have sold holy water is false.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
I raise it to demonstrate that the premise upon which you base your a priori finding that the church wouldn't have sold holy water is false.

And I dispute that such a demonstration has been made. All you have done is accuse me of mindlessly supporting whatever Church leaders do, even if that entails mishandling of the abuse crisis.